What do you think?
Rate this book
The Origins of Postmodernity
A history of the postmodern, and the role of Fredric Jameson in shaping it.
Where does the idea of the postmodern come from? Who first conceived, and who developed it? How have its meanings changed? What purposes do they serve? These are the questions addressed in The Origins of Postmodernity. The answers take us from Lima to Angkor, to Paris and Munich, to China and the stars. At the center of the story is the figure of Fredric Jameson, theorist supreme of postmodernism. What happens to art, time, politics, in the age of the spectacle? What has ended, and what has begun?
Where does the idea of the postmodern come from? Who first conceived, and who developed it? How have its meanings changed? What purposes do they serve? These are the questions addressed in The Origins of Postmodernity. The answers take us from Lima to Angkor, to Paris and Munich, to China and the stars. At the center of the story is the figure of Fredric Jameson, theorist supreme of postmodernism. What happens to art, time, politics, in the age of the spectacle? What has ended, and what has begun?
150 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1998
25 people are currently reading
1219 people want to read
About the author
Perry Anderson
111 books260 followersPerry Anderson is an English Marxist intellectual and historian. He is Professor of History and Sociology at UCLA and an editor of the New Left Review. He is the brother of historian Benedict Anderson.
He was an influence on the New Left. He bore the brunt of the disapproval of E.P. Thompson in the latter's The Poverty of Theory, in a controversy during the late 1970s over the scientific Marxism of Louis Althusser, and the use of history and theory in the politics of the Left. In the mid-1960s, Thompson wrote an essay for the annual Socialist Register that rejected Anderson's view of aristocratic dominance of Britain's historical trajectory, as well as Anderson's seeming preference for continental European theorists over radical British traditions and empiricism. Anderson delivered two responses to Thompson's polemics, first in an essay in New Left Review (January-February 1966) called "Socialism and Pseudo-Empiricism" and then in a more conciliatory yet ambitious overview, Arguments within English Marxism (1980).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perry_An...
He was an influence on the New Left. He bore the brunt of the disapproval of E.P. Thompson in the latter's The Poverty of Theory, in a controversy during the late 1970s over the scientific Marxism of Louis Althusser, and the use of history and theory in the politics of the Left. In the mid-1960s, Thompson wrote an essay for the annual Socialist Register that rejected Anderson's view of aristocratic dominance of Britain's historical trajectory, as well as Anderson's seeming preference for continental European theorists over radical British traditions and empiricism. Anderson delivered two responses to Thompson's polemics, first in an essay in New Left Review (January-February 1966) called "Socialism and Pseudo-Empiricism" and then in a more conciliatory yet ambitious overview, Arguments within English Marxism (1980).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perry_An...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 37 reviews
May 4, 2010
Anderson does go in a bit heavy for the praise when it comes to Jameson, but I consider this essential reading for anyone who tackles Jameson's tome on postmodernism. After all, if you've had the courage to face all of that, Anderson's clear prose and nimble intellect will be enjoyable beach reading. Is there any subject this guy can't comment upon authoritatively? He'll give you the global context of Jameson's master work, and summarize the major monographs that responded to it.
I particularly enjoyed his discussion of color TV as the "technological watershed" of postmodernity. It resonates nicely with Horkheimer and Adorno's comments on TV as Gesamtkunstwerk in "The Culture Industry."
I particularly enjoyed his discussion of color TV as the "technological watershed" of postmodernity. It resonates nicely with Horkheimer and Adorno's comments on TV as Gesamtkunstwerk in "The Culture Industry."
July 7, 2009
Well, it's not exactly what the title claims. But the first two chapters are good, short summaries of the rise of the terms and ideas around 'postmodernism.' The third is an appreciation and summary of Fredric Jameson's work. The fourth is a survey of responses to his work, and Anderson's own slightly random thoughts on these matters.
The first three chapters are great, the fourth a bit aimless. But if you want a good history of these ideas, and/or a good introduction to Jameson, this is your book.
The first three chapters are great, the fourth a bit aimless. But if you want a good history of these ideas, and/or a good introduction to Jameson, this is your book.
May 10, 2019
лівака попросили написати передмову до праці Ф. Джеймісона (теж лівака), а він захопився і переповів історію постмодернізму, схаменувшись на 80 сторінці, "дійшовши" до винуватця, щоб за 40 сторінок знову про нього забути й почати викладати своє уявлення про заявлену тему. заголовок праці мало відповідає змісту, хіба що перші сторінок 40, але всюди автор роз'яснює, чому ліва ідея краща.
смисл доповнення у вигляді статті Олександра Бікбова про французьку наукометрію я так і не зрозумів.
смисл доповнення у вигляді статті Олександра Бікбова про французьку наукометрію я так і не зрозумів.
July 31, 2021
Me encanta la jerga oscurantista académica.
July 21, 2009
Like others have said, it's more of a essay on Jameson than a survey. But Anderson makes him sound suitably brilliant and sends you running for
Postmodernism
, and for Anderson's own article 'Modernity and Revolution' - reprinted in
A Zone of Engagement
. The sketch of that article he gives here (on the social conditions of modernism & the postmodern) is basically the most lucid & concise summary i've seen.
Book also features this amazing quote from Lyotard on his own Postmodern Condition : "I made up stories, I referred to a quantity of books I'd never read, apparently it impressed people, it's all a bit of a parody ... It's simply the worst of my books, they're almost all bad, but that one's the worst."
Book also features this amazing quote from Lyotard on his own Postmodern Condition : "I made up stories, I referred to a quantity of books I'd never read, apparently it impressed people, it's all a bit of a parody ... It's simply the worst of my books, they're almost all bad, but that one's the worst."
June 18, 2018
Oh I miss books like this. I'm just not sure it could be published today.
Perry Anderson wrote a book in response to a book. The book in question was Fredric Jameson's The Cultural Turn. Ironically, the 'rejoinder' has ended up with greater longevity than the original.
The critique of postmodernity is clear. There is attacks on periodization and theories of development.
But one profound argument stunned me as I read this book again, post-Trump: “Postmodernism emerged as a cultural dominant in unprecedently rich capitalist societies with very high average levels of consumption.” We - as scholars - still require more complex theorizations of consumption, particularly in understanding the precarious working environment in these nations.
Still a powerful book. Worth a re-reading.
Perry Anderson wrote a book in response to a book. The book in question was Fredric Jameson's The Cultural Turn. Ironically, the 'rejoinder' has ended up with greater longevity than the original.
The critique of postmodernity is clear. There is attacks on periodization and theories of development.
But one profound argument stunned me as I read this book again, post-Trump: “Postmodernism emerged as a cultural dominant in unprecedently rich capitalist societies with very high average levels of consumption.” We - as scholars - still require more complex theorizations of consumption, particularly in understanding the precarious working environment in these nations.
Still a powerful book. Worth a re-reading.
December 12, 2016
Fantastic book by Perry Anderson, a Marxist historian, chronicling the incipient conceptualisation of 'postmodernism' in architecture, the arts, and politics. The first chapter begins by detailing early literary references to the term 'postmodern': initially it meant regressions from the modern. Anderson then moves to a discussion of the work of Ihab Hassan, Charles Jencks, and Jean-Francois Lyotard. He also discusses and provides worthy critique of Jurgen Habermas' "system-lifeworld" theory.
Next comes, basically, a chapter on Fredric Jameson's work, mostly his books The Cultural Turn and Postmodernism, Or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Anderson displays justified admiration for Jameson's works and links Jameson's theory of the postmodern to criticisms of Foucault's relativism and inadequate theory of power, developments in Western Marxism (the Frankfurt School, the Situationist International) and repudiates short-sighted accusations of Jameson's "Eurocentrism" - wrong because Jameson deliberately analyses literary and artistic works from all over the world.
The final chapter is the longest and opens with discussions of several books that criticise the direction of postmodernism after Jameson: David Harvey's The Condition of Postmodernity (which I hope to sink my teeth into this week), Alex Callinicos' Against Postmodernism, and Terry Eagleton's Illusions of Postmodernism. Callinicos and Harvey were published in the turn to the 90's, Eagleton the mid 90's. French cinema, television, Pop Art, Conceptualism, Mallarme's poetry, is discussed, as well as Peter Wollen's more analytical Raiding the Icebox, a work Anderson says is the only one that can stand up to Jameson's. These insights are interspersed with some political real-talk for the Left, including an ever-relevant reminder of the class politics the Left has apparently forgotten amidst the postmodern. Anderson's writing is remarkable.
Next comes, basically, a chapter on Fredric Jameson's work, mostly his books The Cultural Turn and Postmodernism, Or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Anderson displays justified admiration for Jameson's works and links Jameson's theory of the postmodern to criticisms of Foucault's relativism and inadequate theory of power, developments in Western Marxism (the Frankfurt School, the Situationist International) and repudiates short-sighted accusations of Jameson's "Eurocentrism" - wrong because Jameson deliberately analyses literary and artistic works from all over the world.
The final chapter is the longest and opens with discussions of several books that criticise the direction of postmodernism after Jameson: David Harvey's The Condition of Postmodernity (which I hope to sink my teeth into this week), Alex Callinicos' Against Postmodernism, and Terry Eagleton's Illusions of Postmodernism. Callinicos and Harvey were published in the turn to the 90's, Eagleton the mid 90's. French cinema, television, Pop Art, Conceptualism, Mallarme's poetry, is discussed, as well as Peter Wollen's more analytical Raiding the Icebox, a work Anderson says is the only one that can stand up to Jameson's. These insights are interspersed with some political real-talk for the Left, including an ever-relevant reminder of the class politics the Left has apparently forgotten amidst the postmodern. Anderson's writing is remarkable.
January 7, 2019
Woah boy. I first ran into Anderson with his essay “Modernity and Revolution” wherein he tracked the origins of Modernism before determining it to be an empty signifier (along with, by extension, postmodernism). Taking an Marxian view – generally driven as it is by materialism – I wasn’t wholly won over, but could also accept what is, after all, a not uncommon criticism: postmodernism doesn’t mean much because it means too much. In The Origins of Postmodernity I hoped to find an updated and expanded explanation of this thinking. What I got was a sycophant’s book report about Fredric Jameson. The first two chapters covered the etymology and trajectory of postmodernism as a word/concept/condition, and the third and fourth chapters were about Jameson and what he’s written so far and what he wore to school the other day and did you hear he asked Susie Derkins to the Sadie Hawkins dance? and how what he’s written can be applied to the developing scope of neo-liberal capitalism. Inasmuch as Jameson has since written A Singular Modernity in which he claims that postmodernism doesn’t really exist anyway I’m not sure how much of Anderson is salvageable. Read the first two chapters for a fuller non-Eurocentric history of pomo’s birth (for which Anderson is to be commended) and then stop.
August 25, 2009
very good read of history of post-modernism which includes its root, its development, its current condition
July 10, 2023
'The ultimate surrealist act would be to go out on the street and starting shooting at people for no reason".---Andre Breton
Well, Andre, the ultimate postmodernist act would be to wage a war and sell it as a TV show, pay-per-view. (Hint: It's already been done.) Ordinarily, I do not review books by friends, on the grounds that it would like recommending your mistress to other men, or women. I am making an exception for Perry Anderson, first because he is the only person I have ever known in my life whom I would without qualifications call a genius, and second the relevance this blazing volume has to understanding postmodern literature and other arts, from Pynchon and Barth to identity politics novels and films. Perry, practicing historian and editor of NEW LEFT REVIEW, set out to examine just how the image came to be disassociated from anything real, and how the author, the text and even Man himself all died. Although traces of postmodernism can be found in literature and art of the Thirties and Forties, think of Dali's paintings or Malcolm Lowry's novel UNDER THE VOLCANO, both of which are self-referential, postmodernism must be understood in the light of vast changes in capital following World War II, relations between labor and capital, and the "end of ideology" in the West. The dollar replacing the pound as the global currency; the dollar delinked from gold to guarantee its worth, and the shift of advanced capitalist economies from producing goods to services and from services to non-tangibles, above all entertainment and tourism, all signaled an axial shift away from objects, among them food, water, and minerals, to relations and transactions as the main profit-maker for capital. (Lucky for Perry he published this book before the rise of NFTs.) So too did the decline of labor unions and the split between political left and right that had marked the pre-war years. Quick, name a significant difference between Democrat-Republican (USA), Conservative-Labourite (UK) and Christian Democrat-Social Democrat (Germany). Ironically but also inevitably, this convergence among capitalists, combined with their domination over a neutered trade union movement, produced art in which the individual was fragmented (Pollock, Beckett), helpless before the titanic forces before her and him (Pynchon, Godard), or just plain insane (Grass's drummer-boy, Oscar, who never grows up in THE TIN DRUM). Since in a post-modernist society literacy is not a requirement to the good life, defined by passivity, film overtook the novel as the representative, and most profitable, genre of this age. Does this mean all ways of fighting back are doomed? The anti-monopoly (not anti-capitalist) camp is either composed of historical reenactment societies, such as the left parties of Europe or New Deal Democrats in the U.S., or else race and gender political groupings who want integration into the system, on their terms. Perhaps, to quote the premier postmodernist thinker today, Frederic Jameson, we are fated to live our lives championing "libertarian pessimism". Like Spartacus, we will lose, but unlike that rebel genius we can throw a party before being crucified.
Well, Andre, the ultimate postmodernist act would be to wage a war and sell it as a TV show, pay-per-view. (Hint: It's already been done.) Ordinarily, I do not review books by friends, on the grounds that it would like recommending your mistress to other men, or women. I am making an exception for Perry Anderson, first because he is the only person I have ever known in my life whom I would without qualifications call a genius, and second the relevance this blazing volume has to understanding postmodern literature and other arts, from Pynchon and Barth to identity politics novels and films. Perry, practicing historian and editor of NEW LEFT REVIEW, set out to examine just how the image came to be disassociated from anything real, and how the author, the text and even Man himself all died. Although traces of postmodernism can be found in literature and art of the Thirties and Forties, think of Dali's paintings or Malcolm Lowry's novel UNDER THE VOLCANO, both of which are self-referential, postmodernism must be understood in the light of vast changes in capital following World War II, relations between labor and capital, and the "end of ideology" in the West. The dollar replacing the pound as the global currency; the dollar delinked from gold to guarantee its worth, and the shift of advanced capitalist economies from producing goods to services and from services to non-tangibles, above all entertainment and tourism, all signaled an axial shift away from objects, among them food, water, and minerals, to relations and transactions as the main profit-maker for capital. (Lucky for Perry he published this book before the rise of NFTs.) So too did the decline of labor unions and the split between political left and right that had marked the pre-war years. Quick, name a significant difference between Democrat-Republican (USA), Conservative-Labourite (UK) and Christian Democrat-Social Democrat (Germany). Ironically but also inevitably, this convergence among capitalists, combined with their domination over a neutered trade union movement, produced art in which the individual was fragmented (Pollock, Beckett), helpless before the titanic forces before her and him (Pynchon, Godard), or just plain insane (Grass's drummer-boy, Oscar, who never grows up in THE TIN DRUM). Since in a post-modernist society literacy is not a requirement to the good life, defined by passivity, film overtook the novel as the representative, and most profitable, genre of this age. Does this mean all ways of fighting back are doomed? The anti-monopoly (not anti-capitalist) camp is either composed of historical reenactment societies, such as the left parties of Europe or New Deal Democrats in the U.S., or else race and gender political groupings who want integration into the system, on their terms. Perhaps, to quote the premier postmodernist thinker today, Frederic Jameson, we are fated to live our lives championing "libertarian pessimism". Like Spartacus, we will lose, but unlike that rebel genius we can throw a party before being crucified.
May 9, 2022
This is a great summary of the writing that outlines what has come to be known as postmodernism, with an emphasis on the critical text by Fredric Jameson ("Postmoderism or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism"). It's a short book which summarises the origins of the phrase and how it has developed through architecture and art. Anderson traces the connections to economic developments during the twentieth century, and draws in the major works by largely Marxist writers on the subject including Jameson, David Harvey, and Ernest Mandel's "Late Capitalism" which provides much of the economic analysis which underpins this thinking. I came to this after having read Jameson, Harvey, and Mandel (my notes on having read those three are here: https://marxadventure.wordpress.com/2...) and Anderson's book felt like a really neat summation that helped to bookend and summarise my thinking.
July 30, 2024
Für mich größtenteils uninteressant. Geht mehr um die Kunstrichtung als die Periode oder die philosophische Strömung. Wobei alles und auch nicht sehr gut gewichtet und geordnet mit rein spielt.
Das Buch liest sich ungeordnet und durcheinander. Es ist zentral eine Lobhudelei auf Jamesons Begriff der Postmoderne und sein Werk insgesamt zu dem Zeitpunkt. Das ist dermaßen übertrieben, dass es Leute, die den Marxismus noch als revolutionäre Wissenschaft ernst nehmen, peinlich berührt.
Sonst auch einfach viel Geschwafel. Da werden Urteile mit einer Apodiktik über Gegenstände der Kunst gefällt, ohne dass da eine nachvollziehbare Begründung dahinter steckt. Das wirkt oft angelesen oder eie eine stenographische Verschachtelung von Begriffen ohne tieferen logischen Zusammenhang. Man kennt das von Sekundärliteraten.
Die Oberflächlichkeit von Anderson, wenn es um konkrete gesellschaftliche Analysen geht, erinnert mich an Korsch.
Das Buch liest sich ungeordnet und durcheinander. Es ist zentral eine Lobhudelei auf Jamesons Begriff der Postmoderne und sein Werk insgesamt zu dem Zeitpunkt. Das ist dermaßen übertrieben, dass es Leute, die den Marxismus noch als revolutionäre Wissenschaft ernst nehmen, peinlich berührt.
Sonst auch einfach viel Geschwafel. Da werden Urteile mit einer Apodiktik über Gegenstände der Kunst gefällt, ohne dass da eine nachvollziehbare Begründung dahinter steckt. Das wirkt oft angelesen oder eie eine stenographische Verschachtelung von Begriffen ohne tieferen logischen Zusammenhang. Man kennt das von Sekundärliteraten.
Die Oberflächlichkeit von Anderson, wenn es um konkrete gesellschaftliche Analysen geht, erinnert mich an Korsch.
November 2, 2017
Dua bab pertama membahas ringkasan tentang bangkitnya istilah dan gagasan seputar posmodernisme. Bab ketiga adalah apresiasi dan rangkuman karya Fredric Jameson. Bab keempat adalah survei tanggapan terhadap karya Jameson tadi, dan pemikiran Anderson yang sedikit acak tentang masalah ini. Awal beli buku ini acak karena tertarik dengan judulnya, bahkan enggak menyadari kalau Anderson ini sekeluarga sama Benedict Anderson. Waktu itu saya cuma sampai bab kedua, karena lelah sama istilah-istilah, nama-nama dan pemikiran njelimit. Setelah kepincut sama pemikiran Marxis, Frankfurt School dan Kiri Baru, saya membuka lagi buku ini, dan sangat terkesan. Perry Anderson sendiri editor di New Left Review dan seorang intelektual Marxis terpandang.
May 29, 2018
Un ensayo muy interesante. Lo mejor, el estilo de Anderson, que hace la lectura ágil y amena. Lo peor, que sabe a poco en los capítulos finales, en donde desarrolla reflexiones más generales que en la primera parte de la obra. No es un libro redondo por su naturaleza, ya que el hecho de que parta de un análisis general de una parte de la obra de F. Jameson implica que se pierden interesantes reflexiones, con mayor profundidad, sobre algunos de los temas tratados. También se podría esperar una mayor extensión en el comentario de algunas propuestas de Jameson, sobre todo en el ámbito de la crítica literaria. Pero con todo es una lectura muy recomendable y que sin duda alguna merece la pena leer si uno tiene interés por las materias que trata.
January 28, 2021
История исследований постмодернизма, центральной частью которых Андерсон называет книгу Джеймисона Постмодернизм. Джеймисон описывает модернизм с точки зрения марксизма, то есть он есть надстройка к базису позднего капитализма. Ценно, что автор пишет и о том, что было до Джеймисона и что было после. Также Андерсон называет Джеймисона создателем нарратива о западном марксизме в не переведенной на русский книге Марксизм и форма, которую захотелось прочитать даже больше, чем Постмодернизм.
February 12, 2024
Este libro de P. Anderson explica las circunstancias que dieron paso al posmodernismo en el arte, la política y la cultura del S XX en general. Lyotard y Jameson se citan en estas páginas con frecuencia. Una obra de referencia necesaria para entender la evolución de las ideas en el siglo pasado, y para comprender el presente.
October 16, 2019
Encuentro reflexiones miy interesantes sobre el momento histórico que se ha dado a conocer como posmodernidad. El problema es que estas reflexiones están rodeadas de otras tantas imposibles de descifrar por su jerga académico-filosófica.
January 3, 2021
Книга досить ідеологічно заряджена, позаяк автор переконаний марксист, і намагається оцінити явище постмодерну саме зі своєї ідеологічної перспективи. Однак, мені здалися досить вартісними та актуальними пасажі про демаркацію модерну та постмодерну.
October 3, 2024
Totxo mig filosòfic infumable. Encara no entenc què és la postmodernitat.
És un recull de teories que no acaba de deixar res clar, però em servirà per entendre les teories de classe.
Això sí, la portada de la traducció en català és preciosa, llàstima que no estigui al Goodreads.
És un recull de teories que no acaba de deixar res clar, però em servirà per entendre les teories de classe.
Això sí, la portada de la traducció en català és preciosa, llàstima que no estigui al Goodreads.
March 2, 2018
Deep, challenging, informative and eye opening. Will also make you want to read a number of other famous texts on the same subject. Whilst short it covers a wide expanse.
August 17, 2018
Postmodernity is not just stupid memes. A good book about the origins of this term
April 28, 2020
Review to follow
July 28, 2020
Libro imprescindible para quien esté interesado por los orígenes del concepto "posmodernidad"
March 8, 2021
An excellent entry point into postmodern theory, focusing especially on the work of Fredric Jameson, who the author absolutely bloody loves.
May 3, 2022
Brilliant overview of the rise of the concept of Postmodernism, great companion to Jameson's work
October 12, 2023
Buena introducción a Jameson. Entra fácil.
December 26, 2023
Interesting but non-essential companion to Jameson's Postmodernism
December 30, 2024
Me banearon de la Maria Moliner por su culpa.
Gran libro, ahora odio a los Smiths aun más
Gran libro, ahora odio a los Smiths aun más
Read
October 13, 2025habré entendido como un 30% ... me conformo con eso
December 27, 2025
Impressively dense
Displaying 1 - 30 of 37 reviews